Section 3 AA Presumption Cannot Cure Repeated Failures of Arbitral Notice
Order dated 2.7.2026 of the High Court of Bombay in Arbitration Appeal No.18 of 2025 of Sedhram Nilkanth Muglikar and another Vs. M.R. Makhare Arbitrator Arbitral Authority and others with connected matter
The challenge to the Award in Section 37 appeal was that no notice of the appointment of Arbitrator & arbitral proceedings were given to the appellants and therefore, the award is vitiated under Section 34(2)(a)(vii) of the AA.
In that context, the question of “deemed or presumed service” of the notices has assumed significance.
On perusal of the record, the HC found that no attempt was made to serve the appellants by email although the Bank had email address.
Secondly, the record reveals repeated failures of service, unexplained references to the unidentified “second address” and absence of proof thereof. Therefore, the deeming provision of Section 3 AA is not attracted.
